Thursday, January 24, 2008

Who's to blame for the cable conspiracy?

Everyone that has cable knows what I am talking about... in order to get a few channels that you want, you have to get a slew that you don't want and pay for the whole thing as a bundle or tier. And by pay I mean an arm and a leg.

Well cable is trying to blame the big media companies. And as cynical as I am, I can see companies like Disney and Time-Warner pulling crap like this.

Of course, cable doesn't need to "stand up" to media companies, because cable companies in most, if not all, areas have effective monopolies. It's not like I can call another cable company and see if they'll offer me a better deal.

Broadband by the byte?

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Color quiz

you are mediumseagreen#3CB371

Your dominant hues are cyan and green. Although you definately strive to be logical you care about people and know there's a time and place for thinking emotionally. Your head rules most things but your heart rules others, and getting them to meet in the middle takes a lot of your energy some days.

Your saturation level is medium - You're not the most decisive go-getter, but you can get a job done when it's required of you. You probably don't think the world can change for you and don't want to spend too much effort trying to force it.

Your outlook on life is brighter than most people's. You like the idea of influencing things for the better and find hope in situations where others might give up. You're not exactly a bouncy sunshine but things in your world generally look up.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Tom and Jerry get medieval

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Movie Review: In the Name of the King

Whoever underwrites Uwe Boll's movies must do it as a tax write-off.

Despite being based on an obscure but reportedly well-crafted computer game, Dungeon Siege, ItNotK managed to attract some well known actors. It had potential to be a decent movie. Before Boll got named as director.

I am usually pretty forgiving of fantasy movies... I don't expect them to be historical or realistic. But I expect them to be entertaining. For the millions that must have been thrown at this movie, it was pathetic. I need a new job... I'll sit down with directors and let them tell me about their ideas for their movie.

Then I'll spray them with a bottle of water while yelling "No! No! No! Bad! Bad! Bad!"

I can just see it...

Uwe: "The hero will have a boomerang that'll even come back to him if he hits something!"Oz: [sprays water] "No! That was lame even in Beastmaster! This isn't the 80's. Boomerangs don't come back after they hit something."

Uwe: "Look at the designs for the bad guys! They're called Krugs."Oz: [sprays water] "Bad Uwe! Those look like mutant orc turtles."

Uwe: "We'll establish that the girl is good with a sword then never let her use it. And look at her costume designs."Oz: [rolls up script and hits Uwe on the nose] "No! Bad! Bad director! If she's a bad ass, let her kill someone. And what the fuck is up with that armor? If you're going to cover Leelee up like that, don't make the armor from Ren Faire leftovers and 80s scifi hand-me-downs."

Uwe: "Look at the tree chicks. They swing from vines that magically grab people. And they swing from vines. Here's the finished CGI for the vines.Oz: "Uwe, that's a Commodore 64. What the fuck? Are they dryad trapeze artists? That's it, get in your crate."Uwe: "But they swing from vines..."Oz: [sprays water] "In your crate. Don't make me tase you."

It had potential for bad ass action (I'm a big fan of the original Transporter) and hot chicks. Instead everyone hams it up, phones it in, and the shit looks lame. Well except for Ray Liotta's coat. "Bad" characters get the best coats.

Rating: 1 out of 5 want their money back flying monkeys. And their damned 2.5 hours.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Hancock

I originally only glimpsed this preview, so I called it a superhero movie with real world physics. Now that I've been able to watch it, it's a superhero movie with lots of property damage. And it looks amusing.

Monday, January 07, 2008

Are you burnt out?

You Are 45% Burned Out

You're fairly burned out, and it shows.You probably have been feeling a little rundown and irritable lately.If you can, drop a few of your minor responsibilities and focus on what's really important.You have too much on your plate, and it's catching up with you.

Apparently they haven't seen how often some of my players roll 20s.Some of the reasoning is sound. It creates less of a swing in damage, especially when dealing with higher end monsters. A fighter that does d8+6, under the old system would do 2d8+12, average of 21 and a peak of 28, in the new system does 14. But the monster with 3d6+10, under the old system would do 6d6+20, an average of 41 with a peak of 50 but in the new system do 28.

So crits will happen much more often, but the damage will be less variable. Which means it is less likely someone will get wiped out by a freak roll.

I think that my biggest problem is that really hard to hit targets, requiring to 20 to hit, in theory would always result in crits.

I've been running 3.75, most of which can be found here. I'm still debating whether to test drive this new rule in my D&D campaign, especially in regards to spells. While my players don't have any of the big guns yet, they are getting high enough level that they could run into someone who could throw a lightning bolt or fireball... 5d6 becomes 30 points of fun!